Revelations of radioactive cow carcasses buried beneath land slated for a $20 billion education precinct in Melbourne's west should be no cause for alarm, the state government says.
Fairfax Media revealed on Sunday 60 carcasses were buried at a Werribee site the government was trying to sell to a Chinese consortium
Documents obtained by Fairfax Media estimated the cost of cleaning up the radioactive waste could reach $300 million.
Environment Minister Lily D'Ambrosio did not deny the 775-hectare site was contaminated by toxic waste.
Related Content
But she said a more recent report to be released publicly shortly indicated there had been no flow-on contamination.
"I can assure everyone that with the more recent report into the extent of the contamination of that land ... indicates that there is no cause for concern in terms of contamination to ground water in the effects beyond the actual area of the land itself."
She said she was "very confident", based on advice received, "that there is no impact on ground water, and anywhere outside that contaminated land itself".
A consortium called Investors Direct is the last remaining bidder on the site, which includes parts of the old State Research Farm, laboratories and veterinary schools, where for decades there was scientific testing on animals.
Investors Direct, with former premier John Brumby an adviser, plans to build an Australian Education City, home to 80,000 residents and 50,000 students on land adjoining the planned new youth detention centre.
Documents obtained by Fairfax Media estimated the cost of cleaning up the radioactive waste could reach $300 million, with a further $770 million required to removed thousands more cow carcasses considered a biological hazard.
But Ms D'Ambrosio said on Sunday that indications from the potential developers were that those estimates were out of date, and that the contamination clean-up's actual cost would be more like $35 million.
She told a press conference that any government approval of a development would be conditional on "total rehabilitation" of the land.
"What is important to be very clear about today is that any development – before planning processes are concluded, before environmental assessments are concluded, before any approvals are issued – that any proponent can only go forward with a proposal, with a development, if they are able to, very clearly, acquit all of the requirements in terms of total rehabilitation of that land.
"The cost of that, of course, has to be borne by them, and is included within any consideration of approvals, going forward."